PARENT GUIDE TO SCHOOL DISCIPLINE

The Massachusetts Appleseed Center for Law & Justice has released the comprehensive-seeming "PARENT GUIDE TO SCHOOL DISCIPLINE: WHEN MY CHILD IS DISCIPLINED AT SCHOOL, A Guide for Massachusetts Families."massappleseed.org/projects/parent-guide-en/

Mass. Mandated Reporting Law under consideration

The CommonWealth Magazine article, 

State considering major expansion of child abuse reporting laws 

Proposal raises fears of racial disproportionality , Shira Schoenberg, March 29, 2021

takes a close look at both sides of the proposal to add more categories

to the Massachusetts list of people who are required to report to DCF

when they suspect children are being abused or neglected.

See the current list Mandated Reporters here: Mass. General Laws 

Chapter 119, section 21. This subsection tells when mandated

reporters "in [their] professional capacity" are required to 

"immediately communicate with the department orally and, 

within 48 hours, shall file a written report with the 

department detailing the suspected abuse or neglect":

reasonable cause to believe that a child is suffering physical or emotional injury resulting from: (i) abuse inflicted upon him which causes harm or substantial risk of harm to the child's health or welfare, including sexual abuse; (ii) neglect, including malnutrition; (iii) physical dependence upon an addictive drug at birth, ... or (iv) being a sexually exploited child; or (v) being a human trafficking victim as defined by section 20M of chapter 233. Mass. Gen. Laws c. 119, sec. 51A(a) 

Section 51B, the DCF 2009 Intake Regulation, and DCF's 2020 Protective Intake Policy lay out what DCF is supposed to do when it receives a 51A report of child abuse or neglect. Yes, there are unresolved discrepancies between the policy, which are DCF's directions to its employees, and the earlier regulation, which has the force of law. For these reasons, the significance of the consequences of becoming involved in the DCF investigation / intake process, and reasons set out in my 2012 post, "When DCF Comes a-Calling: How to Try to Stay Out of the Fire When You're Already in the Frying Pan" you should definitely consider seeking counsel if someone tells you they are reporting you to DCF or if you get a call or visit from DCF. If you cannot afford and attorney, seek out a Legal Services program for free representation

If, after reading the above and maybe also "The Mandated Reporter Commission Status Report to the Legislature, December 28, 2020," you have an opinion on whether the definitions of "mandated reporter," "abuse," "neglect," when things must be reported to DCF, what protections people who report to DCF should have, and what rights and remedies people should have when they have been reported to DCF, consider contacting your State Representative or State Senator to inform them. If you don't know who they are, use this form from the Secretary of the Commonwealth to find out.

 

The Prosecutor's Story

Prosecutors say that they only charge people when they have a strong case.

• Is it true?
• Is it trash talk, like that of basketball players?
• Is it legitimate public relations?
• Is it a form of jury tampering? 

I was listening to a former federal prosecutor recently discussing whether the twice-impeached, former POTUS would be prosecuted for his criminal behavior. I want exPOTUS45* to be held responsible for the many harms he has caused and his civil, moral, and criminal misdeeds. I was a bit disheartened by the commentator's presentation, which seemed to say that there was a less than 100% chance of some of the prosecutions I hope to see.

Then, my defense attorney conscience kicked in and asked me the questions above.

Despite the presumption of innocence set out in our Bill of Rights and taught as an essential part of our government legal systems, jurors and even judges often come to the process of adjudicating the facts of a case with an assumption that the defendant wouldn't be here, the government wouldn't have brought a case against them, law enforcement personnel wouldn't have arrested them, child protective services wouldn't have taken their children away, if they didn't do anything wrong.

I suppose it's natural for people who have never been wrongly accused or who have been taught in school or by popular media that law enforcement personnel follow the law and the evidence and, like the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, "always get their man," to believe where there's smoke, there's fire or when there's a case something bad happened.  Hearing the prosecutors' drumbeat that they won't charge without a strong case made me worry that it would overwhelm the presumption of innocence for most audiences. It would be consistent with their preconceived notions of justice and the legal system.

The concept of confirmation bias says that people more readily accept ideas that are consistent with what they already believe. The concept of cognitive dissonance says that people tend to reject ideas that do not conform to their preconceived notions.

I think it would be improper for a prosecutor to include an assertion about the inherent strength of a case in an opening statement or closing argument. It may even be improper to ask a witness a question that would produce such a self-affirming response.

But doesn't the statement have a similar effect, of degrading the presumption of innocence, when the vast majority of jurors and judges hear it or read it every day from the news sources they seek out and trust?